1 |
On Sat, 22 Feb 2014 17:16:11 +0100 |
2 |
Dirkjan Ochtman <djc@g.o> wrote: |
3 |
|
4 |
> On Sat, Feb 22, 2014 at 12:06 AM, Tom Wijsman <TomWij@g.o> |
5 |
> wrote: |
6 |
> > Currently, the MATE overlay has 14 meta-base packages and 16 |
7 |
> > mate-extra packages; this might slightly change when reconsidering |
8 |
> > if their location is alright, however it is near the average (~15) |
9 |
> > per category so that should be fit. |
10 |
|
11 |
TL;DR: My avg was wrong, it is larger (110); but low (51) on *-base. |
12 |
|
13 |
The average there was based on what I historically saw mentioned in |
14 |
another new category thread, our categories seem to have grown since; I |
15 |
didn't actually check it, but running the following command to check |
16 |
out the actual average it seems that it is higher at ~110 packages. |
17 |
|
18 |
`for d in $(find /usr/portage/ -maxdepth 1 -type d | grep -) ; do ls -1 |
19 |
${d} | wc -l ; done | awk '{sum+=$1}END{print sum/NR}'` |
20 |
|
21 |
If we however do this on the -base packages (grep -- -base), we get ~51 |
22 |
packages as being the average; gnome-base for example has 41 packages. |
23 |
|
24 |
> That seems a little on the small side? Can we just do a single |
25 |
> category for all of it, instead? People can go bikeshed on the name. |
26 |
|
27 |
TL;DR: Yes, we could try that; but what would be a consistent name? |
28 |
|
29 |
Given these more correct statistics, that indeed seems rather small; |
30 |
combining them, we indeed would get closer to a reasonable size for a |
31 |
category. But its naming becomes way more tricky then. |
32 |
|
33 |
The first thing that comes to mind is dropping the suffix; but then we |
34 |
end up with just 'mate' which is inconsistent with how we name the rest. |
35 |
|
36 |
Since introducing a suffix after 'mate' when grouping all packages |
37 |
doesn't really make much sense, it might make more sense to make '-mate' |
38 |
the suffix. But enumerating existing prefixes, I see none that makes |
39 |
sense; see for yourself: app-mate, dev-mate, games-mate, gnome-mate, |
40 |
gnustep-mate, gpe-mate, java-mate, kde-mate, lxde-mate, mail-mate, |
41 |
media-mate, net-mate, perl-mate, razorqt-mate, rox-mate, sci-mate, |
42 |
sec-mate, sys-mate, www-mate, x11-mate, xfce-mate |
43 |
|
44 |
So, this makes me question why to go for an inconsistent naming; and if |
45 |
we keep 'mate-base' then it feels wrong to move 'mate-extra' stuff in |
46 |
there, so, I really wonder if the amount of packages matters that much. |
47 |
Especially since I count at least 27 categories that are <= 20 pkgs: |
48 |
|
49 |
`for d in $(find /usr/portage/ -maxdepth 1 -type d | grep -) ; do if |
50 |
[[ $(ls -1 ${d} | wc -l) -le 20 ]] ; then echo ${d} ; fi ; done | wc -l` |
51 |
|
52 |
Doing this again we see 43 categories that are <= 30 pkgs, that's like |
53 |
a quarter of the Portage tree; it's representative to show that this is |
54 |
uncommon, but not necessarily an actual exception. |
55 |
|
56 |
It's indeed a recipe for bikeshedding; but I want to avoid this from |
57 |
falling under a situation where there's no actual decision no which way |
58 |
we proceed. |
59 |
|
60 |
As I see it going forward: |
61 |
|
62 |
- If we agree on a consistent name for a single category, we pick that. |
63 |
|
64 |
- If we don't agree on a name for a single category, we see whether |
65 |
we want to agree on just having two categories to be consistent. |
66 |
|
67 |
- If we neither agree on the naming or two categories, I see myself |
68 |
forced to insert MATE packages across other existing categories; but |
69 |
I don't think people would be happy with that either. |
70 |
|
71 |
Thank you in advance for further input on this. |
72 |
|
73 |
-- |
74 |
With kind regards, |
75 |
|
76 |
Tom Wijsman (TomWij) |
77 |
Gentoo Developer |
78 |
|
79 |
E-mail address : TomWij@g.o |
80 |
GPG Public Key : 6D34E57D |
81 |
GPG Fingerprint : C165 AF18 AB4C 400B C3D2 ABF0 95B2 1FCD 6D34 E57D |